Friday, October 27, 2006

Monks Press Conference

He stated that he was committed to defeating Nifong, and for him at this stage, "The primary concern is electability."

But it's hard to conclude that is so.

Sunday, I spoke to Cliff Brandt, a Monks advisor, to ask him if the campaign planned to do any polling; Brandt told me no. But today Monks released a poll showing him with 22% of the vote (as opposed to 2% in the N&O poll). Monks didn't distribute copies of the poll; I asked for one and he promised to send it to me.

The poll seems to make little sense: while the Cheek and undecided voters tally the same amount as in the N&O poll, Nifong is around 10% lower and Monks around 20% higher. The only way to get these figures is hard to believe: in effect, according to the Monks poll, there has been a considerable shift in black support (Nifong's base and the majority of his overall support) from Nifong to Monks.

The only problem? In the N&O poll, Monks registered 0% support from blacks. In his poll (he didn't provide demographic or racial breakdowns), he would seem to be getting between 30 and 40 percent of the black vote.

Monks then offered his "analysis" of an average of his poll and that of the N&O, but the analysis seemed little more then wishful thinking. He added that the campaign was planning a media buy, but refused to reveal the amount or to say what he specifically planned to do. And he repeated his call for the Cheek forces to endorse him.

Since I attended, I figured I'd raise a question, and asked Monks if he could cite an instance of another successful candidate, anywhere in the country, in a county-wide, state, or federal election, at any point in the last 25 years, who was polling at 2% in a major media poll three weeks before election day. Monks replied that he hadn't done any research into the matter. (I have: to my knowledge, there aren't any.)

It seems to me that if Monks' primary goal is ensuring Nifong's removal, the past performance of candidates polling at such a low level at this stage of the race should be enough to persuade him to withdraw. Given that Nifong's base is a solid 45%, it's very hard to see how Nifong can be defeated as long as Monks stays in the race. So, at this point, Monks' primary concern seems to be ensuring Nifong's reelection.

What is with this guy? Durham seems to be like a different planet. NO Republican anywhere in the nation is going to be able to obtain a large percentage of black voters. He seems to be living in a "wonderland" of his own and determined to elect Nifong. Not only is he a Republican, in a very Democratic county - frankly, when I have heard him speak, he is simply not impressive. By the way, I am a Republican, but always vote for the individual candidate, not the party. In this case, I can't imagine not voting for Cheek.

Monks -- A politician with a napoleon complex. Jeesh! He's sees this as his "moment" and all he has is ego. Who does he think is going to believe these fake polling numbers? Um, don't we already have one confirmed pander-er?

He would make more points with Republicans of Durham for any future aspirations he may have, if he were to drop out and solidify the recall Nifong folk, and somehow he thinks he is doing the right thing?

How do these people become lawyers???? There is no evidence of logical thinking coming out of Monk's mouth. He could not even get enough signatures to get on the ballot!

Why can't Monks drop out for the election so Nifong can get the boot and then the Govenor appoints Monks. I seriously don't think anyone else would want the job of DA in Durham right now to clean up Nifong's mess. The Governor should meet with Monks and assure him he would be one of his choices. This way also the Govenor will be able to slither out of this problem of Nifong in office without to much political fall out. And he would look like a good guy by appointing someone who wants the job.

There is no doubt in my mind that Monks is working on behalf of Nifong in exchange for future benefits with respect to court appointments and favors.

There is no other logical explanation other than extreme stupidity or mental illness. Monks has no message that he is trying to advance as in the case of typical spoiler candidates such as Nader, for example.

Monks "poll" was conducted by John L. Barker Strategies of Union County. The yellow pages shows no listing for this company. The Secretary of State has no record of this business as a corporation or as an individual DBA. The Better Business Bureau and the Chamber of Commerce also have no record. Union County shows no business liscense for this company. John Barker is the former head of the Union County Republican party. Mr. Barker was once arrested for threatening Governor Easley. He is also a retired metal manufacturing teacher. I can find no record of him ever having conducted a political poll prior to this one. he claims the poll was conducted between 10/17 and 10/19 but doesn't know who made the calls or who was called other than people who voted in the past 4 general elections. He claims that the company John L. Barker Strategies is a subsidiary of Harvard University's Center of Humanities.

Blog Awards

About Me

I am from Higgins Beach, in Scarborough, Maine, six miles south of Portland. After spending five years as track announcer at Scarborough Downs, I left to study fulltime in graduate school, where my advisor was Akira Iriye. I have a B.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard, and an M.A. from the University of Chicago. At Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center, I teach classes in 20th century US political, constitutional, and diplomatic history; in 2007-8, I was Fulbright Distinguished Chair for the Humanities at Tel Aviv University.

Book

Comments Policy

(1) Comments are moderated, but with the lightest of touches, to exclude only off-topic comments or obviously racist or similar remarks.

(2) My clearing a comment implies neither that I agree nor that I disagree with the comment. My opinion is expressed in my words and my words only. Since this blog has more than 1500 posts, and since I at least occasionally comment myself, the blog provides more than enough material for readers to discern my opinions.

(3) If a reader finds an offensive comment, I urge the reader to e-mail me; if the comment is offensive, I will gladly delete it.

(4) Commenters who either misrepresent their identity or who engage in obvious troll behavior will not have their comments cleared. Troll-like behavior includes, but is not limited to: repeatedly linking to off-topic sites; repeatedly asking questions that already have been answered; offering unsubstantiated remarks whose sole purpose appears to be inflaming other commenters.

"From the Scottsboro Boys to Clarence Gideon, some of the most memorable legal narratives have been tales of the wrongly accused. Now “Until Proven Innocent,” a new book about the false allegations of rape against three Duke lacrosse players, can join these galvanizing cautionary tales . . , Taylor and Johnson have made a gripping contribution to the literature of the wrongly accused. They remind us of the importance of constitutional checks on prosecutorial abuse. And they emphasize the lesson that Duke callously advised its own students to ignore: if you’re unjustly suspected of any crime, immediately call the best lawyer you can afford."--Jeffrey Rosen, New York Times Book Review